Republicans Give Democrats a Win in Tense Airport Feud

House Republicans helped Democrats kill a Republican amendment that would have expanded the number of flights to and from Washington, D.C., a change that could have inconvenienced 25 million passengers.

During Wednesday's House vote on more than 100 amendments made to the bipartisan Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reauthorization bill, lawmakers voted against adopting one markup that would have allocated seven new slots at the popular Washington Reagan National Airport (DCA) just outside of Washington, D.C. It is the major airport used by members of Congress, and its expansion has been subject to a tense battle. The final vote was 205 to 229, with 167 Republicans and 38 Democrats in favor of the amendment, and 55 Republicans and 174 Democrats in opposition.

The amendment, introduced by 10 House Republicans, would have added seven new round-trip slots, one for each airline currently operating at DCA. DCA is the only airport that is subject to federal restrictions over the number of daily flights allowed in and out to limit congestion and traffic.

Four Democratic senators from the D.C. metro area staunchly opposed the amendment, arguing that Republican lawmakers are "micromanaging" airports to make air travel more convenient for those working on the Hill while making flying more of a headache for everyday travelers.

"They shouldn't be screwing around with our airports," Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia told Punchbowl News. "The convenience of a few dozen members does not even begin on a scale to equal the inconvenience of the 25 million passengers [per year] who use Reagan National."

Kaine, alongside Senators Mark Warner of Virginia, Chris Van Hollen of Maryland and Ben Cardin of Maryland, warned that if House Republicans included the DCA provision in the FAA bill, it would have killed the entire reauthorization package, which needs to be passed before current authority expires at the end of September.

House Democrats also argued on Wednesday that rather than improving travel for members of Congress flying to and from D.C., the expansion would have made their commutes worse.

"DCA is way overcapacity. This is the busiest runway in America, one of the shortest, and 25 million people were served last year in an airport designed for 14 million. Twenty percent of flights are already more than an hour late and this will only make it worse," Representative Don Beyer of Virginia said from the House floor. "This is a congested, complex airspace, think the Capitol, White House, Pentagon, and [it has] the third highest aborted takeoffs and landings. These safety concerns will only be magnified."

Proponents of the amendment, on the other hand, argued that the DCA provision would "modernize" the airport and provide American consumers with more options when flying in and out of Washington, D.C.

A May 25 memo sent by the Air Traffic Organization (ATO) to the Office of Government & Industry Affairs said that DCA ranks 10th among the most delayed airports in the National Airspace System.

"About 20% of departures and 22% of arrivals experience average delays of 67 minutes coming in and out of DCA," the memo reads. The ATO also noted that the FAA imposes slot limits when demand exceeds capacity and that the DCA having an extra minute of block time buffer "actually suggests underperformance" compared to other major airports, suggesting that additional slots at the hub would cause further disruptions at DCA.

But even some House Republicans opposed the GOP-led markup. Representative Rob Whitman of Virginia took the floor to vocally fight the provision, making a direct jab at one of his Republican colleagues, Representative Chip Roy of Texas, who argued the existing federal rule was only in place because of previous overregulation.

After Roy criticized the existing rules at DCA as "a protectionist racket," Whitman repeatedly said the opposition was "not a racket."

"The additional 14 flights would further exacerbate an already stressed airport. It is not a racket! With limited gates and physical activity, DCA doesn't have the space to safely process additional flight operations, often resulting in planes sitting on the tarmac waiting. It is not a racket," Whitman shouted.

"Not only does Reagan not have the capacity to support this extension, there are no protections against negative impacts on other complimentary flights and other airports in the region," he said. "It's not a racket! Without protections to ensure the safety and sustainability of Reagan National and the stability of other regional airports, this amendment would only hinder the current system. It is not a racket!"